gshc2020.com

Nitrate naturally accumulates in vegetables from the soil, but it does not benefit the body until bacteria in the mouth convert it into nitrite. Nitrite helps relax and widen blood vessels, improving blood flow and contributing to lower blood pressure.

How Mouth Acidity Affects Nitrate Conversion

Scientists have long known that oral bacteria are essential for converting nitrate into nitrite. Because this process limits how much nitrate the body can use, researchers have been searching for ways to make the conversion more efficient.

One possibility is that increasing the acidity of saliva could speed up this chemical reaction. To investigate, the research team tested whether chewing sugar-containing gum, which lowers the pH inside the mouth, would increase nitrite production.

Dr. Andrew Webb, Clinical Senior Lecturer in the School of Cardiovascular & Metabolic Medicine & Sciences, King's College London, said: "Whether and how the acidity of the saliva in the mouth impacts the conversion of the inactive nitrate, to the more active nitrite, is a fundamental question, as it impacts a range of important physiological functions including blood pressure. However, this process has not been studied much.

"While most research suggests that increasing acidity inhibits the conversion of nitrate, this has never been investigated in the whole body, over several hours.

"Incidentally, we previously found that combining grapefruit juice with beetroot juice decreased the acidity of the saliva and inhibited the conversion of nitrate to nitrite in the saliva. So, we wanted to formally test whether doing the opposite - increasing the acidity of the saliva - would enhance the conversion of nitrate to nitrite."

Beetroot Juice and Chewing Gum Study

Healthy volunteers took part in a crossover study in which they drank a shot of beetroot juice before chewing either sugar-containing (Hubba Bubba® bubble) gum or sugar-free (Wrigley's Extra®) gum for three to six hours. Throughout the experiment, researchers collected blood and saliva samples and monitored blood pressure. At least one week later, each participant returned to repeat the study using the other type of gum.

Compared with the sugar-free gum, chewing Hubba Bubba significantly increased saliva acidity, producing a 1.4 point drop in pH. Participants also showed a 45% increase in nitrite levels in the mouth and a 25% increase in nitrite circulating throughout the body.

The sugary gum group also experienced a measurable reduction in blood pressure. Systolic blood pressure (when the heart pushes blood out) fell by nearly 3 mmHg, while diastolic blood pressure (when the heart relaxes between beats) dropped by almost 2 mmHg compared with chewing sugar-free gum.

Not a Blood Pressure Treatment

The researchers emphasize that these findings should not be interpreted as a recommendation to chew sugary gum as a way to control blood pressure. The effects were temporary, and regular consumption of sugary products carries well known risks for dental and overall metabolic health.

However, the discovery could prove useful for athletes, many of whom already consume beetroot because dietary nitrate has been shown to support exercise performance.

Dr. Webb added: "The effects were only short-term, lasting several hours, and long-term use of sugar-containing products would not be recommended for dental health. Nonetheless, the classic culinary tradition of following a starter and a main course, especially if they contain nitrate-rich salad leaves and vegetables, with a sweet dessert - which could be fruit - may temporarily increase blood pressure-lowering and exercise enhancement.

"We also suggest that sugary chewing gum will have a greater effect compared to drinking sugary drinks, as it stays in the mouth for a longer period of time."

Future Research Could Benefit Athletes

Co-author Dr. Charlotte Mills, University of Reading, explained that the findings point to new ways of improving how the body processes nitrate without relying on long-term sugar consumption.

"The bacteria that live in our mouths play a critical role in converting nitrate from foods such as beetroot into beneficial compounds that help relax blood vessels and lower blood pressure. Our findings suggest that the presence of sugar may create a more favorable environment for this process.

"We are certainly not suggesting that people should start chewing sugary gum regularly. Frequent sugar consumption is harmful for dental health and is also detrimental to cardiometabolic health when consumed in excess. Instead, our findings provide a proof of concept that we may be able to improve how the body processes dietary nitrate, and future research should focus on developing tooth-friendly, metabolically sound approaches that achieve the same effect.

"The challenge now is to identify alternative strategies that are both effective and appropriate for long-term use.

"Because dietary nitrate is already a recognized sports supplement, there is potential to optimize how athletes use it. If we can enhance nitrate conversion, we may be able to improve the physiological benefits that athletes obtain from nitrate-rich foods.

"We found that something as simple as the type of chewing gum used alongside beetroot juice can influence how effectively the body converts dietary nitrate into compounds that help lower blood pressure."

The research team now plans to conduct a larger study involving athletes to further examine how sugary chewing gum affects nitrate metabolism, blood pressure, and exercise performance.

The findings were published in the British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology. %!s()

I was reminded of this bad dream over the past few years. As my Indigenous school’s instructional technology coordinator, I have seen my office transform from a routine integration hub into a digital confessional. Colleagues and teachers who are trying to navigate destabilizing technology changes slip inside and close the door. Some are looking for practical technology triage, or just a safe space to vent their frustrations, only to recount a similar nightmare. 

For these educators, the experience triggers a sharp wave of panic, a sudden realization that the pedagogical ground has shifted beneath their feet and they can no longer trust their own instincts or traditional technology guardrails. But what follows the panic is a deep, stinging embarrassment. 

With open and hopeful hearts, these teachers publicly praised student writing, extolling the hard work and growth they believed the student had demonstrated, only to find themselves surrounded by the giggles of classmates who already knew the truth: the writing had been fully generated by an AI tool.

The students had technically succeeded while learning very little, a phenomenon Micah Miner describes as unproductive success in “Beyond Secondary Orality.” As a result, teachers and administrators are left trying to respond to tools and behaviors they don’t yet fully understand and have never been trained to address. 

These individual instances of unproductive success were not isolated classroom frustrations; they were early signals of a policy vacuum that would soon overwhelm our entire school system. The challenge becomes infinitely more complex at the school board level, where drafting a formal policy requires balancing the inevitable push toward AI integration with the deeply nuanced and often conflicting perspectives around AI held among students and families in the Native community. Before an AI policy could establish clear lines of accountability for staff and students and safeguard Indigenous data sovereignty, students were already using AI tools outside the school day to engage in cognitive offloading, having essays written for them. 

Because neither an official AI policy nor an academic honesty policy existed, teachers and administrators were forced into the uncomfortable position of responding to what many perceived as cheating without the guidance, definitions or training necessary to do so consistently. 

The problem wasn’t just that students discovered AI before adults did; it was an economy-of-scale issue. Being a one-person technology department meant that the burden of finding a solution and making high-level policy recommendations rested entirely on me. No matter how urgent the crisis, a lone coordinator cannot instantly scale the resources an entire school community needs to decide what AI means, how it should be used, or how we should teach students to navigate it responsibly.

Schools often rely on common sense, hoping that everyone will land on the same understanding. Unfortunately for us, AI has exposed an uncomfortable truth: common sense is often just unspoken assumptions masquerading as policy. Without a common understanding of AI use, implementation practices, potential risks and benefits, schools risk creating inconsistent and inequitable experiences for both students and educators. This raises the question: who decides what is reasonable or what makes a decision good? 

Answering that question didn’t require finding a perfect, pre-packaged solution. Ultimately, it required a small but dedicated team of school leaders, educators and me to build one from the ground up. 

Building a Framework on Common Sense and Community 

For the past several years, it has been my job to learn as much as I can to create our own AI common sense, one based on the mission of our school to prepare our students to carry forward the wisdom of our ancestors for the benefit of future generations. 

My first step was to seek out as much information as possible from trusted sources. This led me to the International Society for Transforming Education and their AI Explorations course, which established my foundational knowledge around AI and machine learning and created a strong network of other professionals who were also trying to navigate without a map. 

My second step was to reach out to my school’s stakeholders to ensure the work on AI benefited from as many diverse perspectives as possible. As a new instructional technology coordinator in 2017, one of the first things I did when establishing my program at Indian Community School was to create a Future Ready Team, a cross-functional group of teachers, IT and administrators. 

These Future Ready Team members became the resident experts during their two-year terms, learning to communicate with vendors and piloting new software and devices. When the issue of AI policy arose, it was this team that rose to the challenge and continued the research process along with me.  

After months of research and collaboration with the Future Ready Team, my binder was overflowing with highlighted articles, ideas, notes and guidance documents — proof that some habits from my 1990s school days die hard — while my computer held an equally overwhelming collection of bookmarked tabs. 

Faced with this data overload, I knew my job was to translate this research into action. The solid footing we needed was a comprehensive AI framework, so I took the lead on designing a model that would serve as a strong foundation for building knowledge and be flexible enough to adapt to the ever-changing AI landscape. 

I personally curated and authored each layer of this framework to meet our school’s specific needs. This included a core policy I developed using resources from the U.S. Department of Education, UNESCO, the Publications office of the European Union and the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction. I also drafted staff AI guidance based on the AI Guidance for Schools Toolkit by TeachAI, revamped our student responsible use policy to incorporate AI guardrails and constructed a visual stoplight of AI usage for classrooms based on the work done in our home state of North Carolina. 

The framework also needed to do more than establish expectations; it needed to support educators in meeting them by addressing critical issues such as safeguarding personally identifiable information, protecting intellectual property and honoring Indigenous data sovereignty. 

Policies Can’t Teach People

While these protocols were a necessary first step in securing our digital environment, a framework is only as effective as the people implementing it. Creating the policy and guidance documents was only part of the work; true equity emerges in a school community’s capacity to respond, specifically having the staff, training, time and funding needed to translate policy into practice. 

Knowing that even the best guidance will sit unused without these resources, we ensured our framework went beyond rules to provide active opportunities for people to learn, question and build understanding together. 

Before students were given access to AI tools on school devices, staff engaged in professional development designed to build AI literacy and confidence. Learning opportunities continued through local and state conferences, while families and community members were invited to join the conversation at an AI literacy night. The goal was not simply to introduce a new technology, but to build a shared foundation for its responsible use. The outcomes of this collective effort extended far beyond compliance. 

Teachers who had previously felt overwhelmed by the sudden influx of these tools gained the confidence needed to navigate them, shifting their approach from policing technology to guiding its purposeful use. 

Similarly, our engagement with families provided parents and community members with a transparent look at what AI usage actually looks like in classrooms. This shared clarity transformed potential anxiety into partnership, ensuring the entire school community was aligned around a unified approach that protects student critical thinking while fostering academic readiness. 

Enduring Understandings Benefit All

Ultimately, this journey has taught me that AI common sense isn’t something we can simply mandate or print out. It isn’t found neatly tucked inside a binder, no matter how many national frameworks we compile. True common sense has to be built intentionally through the collaborative and sometimes uncomfortable work of research, reflection and learning alongside one another. 

While a policy can draw the lines on a map, it is the shared knowledge and trust within a school community that actually gives us the solid footing to move forward. 

At Indian Community School, that forward path is always guided by the principle of thinking seven generations ahead. It is a grounding reminder that the choices we make today about AI are not just about managing next week’s essays or updating a student handbook. They are about shaping students' learning habits and critical thinking abilities long after they leave us. 

For schools everywhere, the challenge now is to look past the establishment of compliance. We must close our binders, sit down with our communities and commit to the slower, more deliberate work of building shared understanding around AI. We have to stop racing to build rules and instead start investing in the training, time and relationships that ground our educators for whatever comes next.  %!s()

Aimed at regulated brokers and funds, the new Visual Edge features provide advanced portfolio analytics, historical Value at Risk (VaR), Conditional Value at Risk (CVaR), Monte Carlo planning simulations, stress testing and Negative Balance Protection (NBP) analysis, enabling brokers to make informed risk decisions based on real-time exposure data.

Historical VaR and CVaR Analysis: The platform calculates portfolio-level Value at Risk (VaR) and Conditional Value at Risk (CVaR) using configurable lookback periods and confidence levels. Financial institutions can analyse risk using multiple historical windows to better understand potential losses under varying market conditions.

Stress Testing: Financial institutions can model the impact of significant market events across portfolios and client accounts, using both historical and user-defined stress scenarios. Risk managers can evaluate how extreme price movements would affect exposures, profitability and capital requirements.

Negative Balance Protection Analytics: Financial institutions can gain an understanding of potential exposure arising from client accounts entering negative equity. The metrics – including the number of clients projected to have negative balances, total negative balance exposure and the number of clients falling below predefined equity thresholds - help firms identify concentrations of risk and assess the potential financial impact of severe market movements.

Tom Higgins, CEO, Gold said: “As market volatility continues to increase, FX and digital asset brokers face growing pressure to understand not only their current exposure but also how extreme market events could impact client accounts and broker capital.  Our new Visual Edge risk features help with scenario planning, providing a comprehensive framework for measuring portfolio risk across individual clients, client groups and business-wide portfolios.

"Brokers need timely, accurate and actionable risk analytics to protect their business and their clients. By combining VaR, CVaR, stress testing and Negative Balance Protection analytics within our existing risk management tool, we are providing clients with a comprehensive view of both client risk and broker exposure, including the ability to identify vulnerabilities before they become real-world problems.”

Visual Edge, which is easily integrated with MT4/MT5, DXtrade and other trading platforms, provides an unparalleled understanding of clients’ trading performance, enabling multi-asset brokers to manage risk, maximise the efficiency of their trading operations and increase profitability. It stands out for its powerful visual analysis capabilities, its scalper detection feature, and ability to provides a complete real-time oversight of a broker’s trading operations, including exposure and P&L. This empowers them to make informed decisions about which clients to A-Book and which to B-Book.

The technology provides a very clear view of which clients are making profits and which clients are making losses, while also allowing brokers to identify if profits or losses are specific to certain types of trades or groups and how consistent these trends are over time.

Visual Edge transforms complex market and portfolio data into clear, actionable risk metrics that support risk management teams, dealing desks, compliance functions, senior management and board-level reporting. These metrics can also help regulated entities to meet their regulatory requirements. The platform supports thousands of accounts while delivering rapid risk calculations suitable for both operational monitoring and management reporting. For further information, please visit www.gold-i.com

Ends 

About Gold-i

Headquartered in the UK, Gold-i is a global market leader in trading technology for the FX and cryptocurrency industries. The company is trusted by brokers, fund managers, prop firms, liquidity providers, exchanges and crypto institutions worldwide to manage liquidity, connectivity, pricing and risk across a broad range of trading platforms.

At the core of Gold-i’s offering is MatrixNET, a sophisticated multi-asset liquidity bridge providing seamless access to deep FX and crypto liquidity, with a multitude of routing and aggregation methods. Integrated with over 80 liquidity providers and 35 leading crypto exchanges, MatrixNET delivers ultra-low latency performance of sub 2 milliseconds, enabling clients to achieve optimal execution, manage flow efficiently and scale their trading operations.  MatrixNET also enables prop firms to simulate real market trading conditions.

Gold-i’s product suite includes a range of MetaTrader tools, advanced risk management products and bridging technology, all designed to improve control, reduce risk and support business growth.

Founded in 2008, Gold-i has a strong reputation for innovation, reliability and exceptional 24/7 customer support. For further information, visit www.gold-i.com or follow Gold-i on LinkedIn

Markets Insider and Business Insider Editorial Teams were not involved in the creation of this post. %!s()

Newsweek reported on a "cigarette renaissance" among Gen Z, a trend that makes me upset and confused, and is hard not to take personally.

I never had even the slightest desire to participate, because, for me, cigarettes represented something far more sinister — death. And I was too afraid to ever try one.

I grew up watching celebrities smoke in movies

Growing up, my mother, who was obsessed with old black-and-white movies from her youth, admired the glamorous film stars, many of whom smoked cigarettes.

When I was young, we watched her favorite movies together on our oversize sofa. I, too, was mesmerized by gorgeous women like Rita Hayworth, dressed in Gilda's flowing gowns, as she used cigarettes to seduce and wield power over the men around her, or Audrey Hepburn in "Breakfast at Tiffany's," carrying the now-iconic cigarette holder as she window-shopped for jewels. Both women seemed so different from anyone I'd ever met, embodying the height of elegance and sophistication.

While I quickly adopted my mom's love for Hollywood's Golden Age, I have never smoked a cigarette, even though most of my friends did as teens. They were the "Breakfast Club" kids who rebelled against conformity and thought that if they smoked, in addition to wearing too much black, they'd appear more mysterious and desirably misunderstood.

My dad had lung cancer

One of my earliest memories is of my dad puffing away on his cigarette while I played in my playpen. He contracted lung cancer when I was 4, and the sight of the black, spidery stitches that crept up his back after surgery made me afraid to hug him. I was always terrified he would get sick again.

Despite quitting, his cancer came back eight years later. I was 12. It turned out his lungs were just too damaged to heal. From then on, an oxygen tank accompanied us everywhere he went; every breath was a struggle. His last two years were agony. As a teenager constantly visiting him in the hospital, I vowed to myself never to smoke. My friends told me I was too uptight. When I'd fruitlessly suggested they stop, they accused me of being preachy.

Some years later, as a 23-year-old actor in NYC, I landed a role in a short film that required my character to smoke. I only had a few lines holding the cigarette and pretending to inhale. I awkwardly fumbled with it between my fingers, hands shaking, trying in vain to imitate classic film stars I grew up with and how they held theirs.

Embarrassingly, holding a cigarette was far harder than keeping my balance in the stiletto heels I was wearing. After several takes, the assistant director took the cigarette from my hand, "This is how you do it," and with enviable flair executed a perfect smoke circle into the air.

I apologized, explaining that I had never even tried a cigarette before. He looked at me with exasperation, shaking his head. Suddenly, I became flooded by traumatic memories of my dad coughing up blood. It was then that I began to realize how much cigarettes were a trigger for me. I even wondered — was it wrong for me to accept a role that compromised my own personal values? So, when all these years later, cigarettes again began flooding the TV, not only was I surprised, but it also brought all those same memories back.

Cigarettes robbed me of time with my dad

Now cigarettes are considered "cool" again. I'm saddened and annoyed at how quickly so many people are willing to forget what smoking does to their health. It feels very selfish to be stripping not just lungs but years away from families of loved ones.

Lung cancer stole my dad, but really, cigarettes robbed us of healthy and happier years together. The ones we did have were full of his anger and frustration due to the suffering he knew he couldn't escape from, and my own fear and anxiety over losing him were overwhelming.

So, despite this resurrection of smoking as it nears Ozempic-level "it" factor, I'm not lighting up anytime soon and hope others who find this latest fad cool will come to their senses. We owe it to ourselves and those we love to do better.

Read next

• Essay

The film follows a Federal Marshal guarding the fiancée of an arms dealer seeking witness protection. Events unfold over the course of one evening as a hurricane rolls in, blocking outside communication and preventing reinforcements from arriving. Together they must fight to survive the onslaught of men working for the arms dealer, as well as the escalating elements of the natural disaster raging outside. 

Screenwriter Mark Bianculli (“How to Rob a Bank”) was tapped to refresh the script and modernize its characters, from a first draft by late writer Gregory Fitzpatrick. The project will be the first big offering in Robinov’s Netflix’s deal, which he’ll produce with Tabitha Shick and Talking Pictures. The former president of Warner Bros. Pictures has shepherded billion-dollar franchises like “The Dark Knight” trilogy and “The Hangover” films.

At Netflix, “Maelstrom” found a path back to the screen thanks to the success of “Carry-On.” That Jason Bateman title spent 11 years dormant before Netflix’s Ori Marmur dusted it off and attached big talent, including director Collet-Serra, sending it to the third most viewed film of all time at the streamer. Marmur and team subsequently put a call out to top producers for their best unmade projects with high-concept hooks, reanimating “Maelstrom” with Netflix development executive Kira Cousineau.

Reps for Ritchson and Collet-Serra had no immediate comment on the matter. A rep for Netflix declined to comment.

Ritchson’s profile has exploded since the advent of his hit Prime Video series “Reacher,” where the tree-sized actor plays a retired military police officer on the run for a murder he didn’t commit. He is repped by WME, Rich Cook at Range Media Partners, Shelter PR, and Hansen Jacobson Teller. Collet-Serra is repped by Scott Greenberg at LBI.
%!s()